[2024] KEHC 6936 (KLR)
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review its own or the Court of Appeal's decisions on conviction and sentence under its revision powers, which are limited to subordinate court decisions. The applicant's reliance on the Muruatetu decision is misplaced, as that precedent applies exclusively to mandatory death...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 6936 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Rai Gofa Rai; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Voi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition E121 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Review of Sentence
- Outcome
- application struck out for want of jurisdiction
- Judges
- GMA Dulu
- Legal Topics
- Review of Sentence, Jurisdiction of High Court, Robbery With Violence, Appellate Review, Mandatory Sentencing
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rai Gofa Rai
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Review of Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Does the High Court have jurisdiction to review its own or the Court of Appeal's decisions on conviction and sentence?
- 2 Does the Muruatetu decision on mandatory death sentences apply to robbery with violence cases?
- 3 Was the application for review of sentence properly filed before the High Court?
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to review its own or the Court of Appeal's decisions on conviction and sentence under its revision powers, which are limited to subordinate court decisions. The applicant's reliance on the Muruatetu decision is misplaced, as that precedent applies exclusively to mandatory death sentences for murder, not for robbery with violence. Since the application was filed in a forum without jurisdiction, the court must strike it out. The principle that jurisdiction is everything requires the court to decline to entertain matters where it lacks authority, as reaffirmed in the Owners of the Motor Vessel 'Lilian S' case.
Court Disposition
application struck out for want of jurisdiction
Orders
- The application is struck out for want of jurisdiction.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Rai v Republic (Petition E121 of 2023) [2024] KEHC 6936 (KLR) (15 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 6936 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Voi
Petition E121 of 2023
GMA Dulu, J
May 15, 2024
Between
Rai Gofa Rai
Applicant
and
Republic
Respondent
Ruling
1. This matter was registered and file opened as a Constitutional Petition, but in actual sense it is a Notice of Motion filed on 14th September 2023, seeking review of sentence.
2. The application was filed with a supporting affidavit sworn by the applicant, in which he depones that he was sentenced to death for robbery with violence in Voi SRM Criminal Case No. 1040 of 2007, and that his appeal to the Mombasa High Court Criminal Appeal No. 127 of 2009 was dismissed, and his further appeal to the Court of Appeal No. 74 of 2012 was also dismissed, and that the death sentence was later commuted by the President to life imprisonment.
3. The Notice of Motion was canvassed through written submissions filed by the applicant as well as the Director of Public Prosecutions. I have perused and considered the submissions filed on both sides.
4. Having considered the grounds on which this application was brought and the submissions on both sides, I come to the conclusion as suggested by the Prosecuting Counsel that this court at this stage has no jurisdiction to deal with and handle this application.
5. The first reason is that though the applicant has asked this court to review his sentence, this court cannot do so under its revision power in Section 362 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap.75), as that revision jurisdiction is limited to dealing with decisions made by subordinate courts, and the decisions in issue herein on both conviction and sentence are the appellate decisions of the High Court and the Court of Appeal, from the trial conducted in the Magistrate’s court. This court cannot purport to review its own decisions or the decisions of the Court of Appeal.
6. Secondly, the Muruatetu & Another =Versus= Republic case (Petition 15 and 16 of 2015) (2021) KESC 31 (KLR) (6th July 2021 (Directions), which the applicant relies upon, only applies to cases of the mandatory death sentences imposed for murder cases. It does not apply to all other cases. Thus this case being a case of robbery with violence, this court cannot purport to deal with it in terms of the reasoning on sentence in the Muruatetu case.
7. In view of the above considerations, and in line with the reasoning in the case of Owners of the Motor Vessel “Lilian S” =Versus= Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd (1989) KLR1, in which it was held that jurisdiction is everything, I have to down my tools.
8. I thus find that this application has been filed in the wrong forum, which has no jurisdiction to entertain it. As a consequence, I strike out the application.
Dated, signed and delivered this 15th day of May 2024 in open court at Voi.GEORGE DULUJUDGEIn the presence of:-Alfred – Court AssistantApplicantMr. Sirima for StatePage 2 of 2